3 Top Sony Lenses for Travel Photography

You convinced me with the 70-300. It’s a great travel lens to keep in the bag.

Hello,with the new 20-70 F4 it requires an update of the video 😅

It really depends where you are going. My big 3 for travel is the 16-35GM, the Sigma 24-70 F2.8, and the 100-400mm GM. I also like to take a 35mm prime with me (the F1.8 is a good option). I also take a RX100 Mk6 in case I just want to take something in a pocket. Remember you don't have to take everything on every day... make decisions for each day based on where you are going and what you think you are going to shoot. Be comfortable that regardless you are going to miss shots... sometimes because you didn't bring the lens, sometimes because you had the wrong lens attached, and sometimes because you didn't make it somewhere because you were tired from hauling too much gear around. Constraining gear inspires creativity...

New Tamron 50-400 !

This advice makes NO sense to me. The whole point of it all is to travel light. If your cabin bag is full of lenses, what's the point?
I'd have been happier if they recommended something like a Tamron 28-200mm F2.8-5.6 Di III RXD for full-frame and a Sony E 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 OSS for APS-C. Sigh.

The Tittle should be "Top Sony GMaster Lens for Traveling" ...LOL....

For travel probably one f2.8 zoom and bunch of primes is best choice

I like your no nonsense approach. Very informative and enjoyable to watch. Thank you!

Sony 24-105 f/4 + Samyang 24 1.8 (the second one for night, forest, campfire and such, and also selfies).

24-105 is for me by far the best travellens

Great choices! I would also bring a fast 50mm ish lens as well. For me I’d bring the Sony 70-300 like you did along with the Tamron 28-200, Sony 20mm f/1.8 and the Sony Zeiss 55mm f/1.8. So many great options out there!

Upon choosing one single lens, I take the 24-240 from Sony on the A9. When I can carry more , I switch to 24-105 with 100-400 all Sony too. Visiting cities, landscapes and small spaces I include Zeiss 16-35. Optional add all my Samyang primes (18,24,35,50,85).

One of those YMMV situations. For travel I like to be as small/light as possible. I know this is heresy to some, but lately I've really liked just taking a high quality 35mm 1.4. And then I supplement with my iPhone. Basically I end up with a very good 35mm for most of my shooting, and 13, 26, and 77mm lenses that are quite good enough for most situations. Really don't need anymore TBH.

Just got the 24-70mm GM II. Haven't even had time to test it yet. But, if it's good at 24mm and 35mm, it and my 70-200mm GM II will probably be my two primary travel lenses for my trip to the Canadian Rockies this Fall. I'm also considering taking the 14mm GM and 100-400mm GM.

Tamron 17-28, Tamron 28-75 and Sigma 100-400.

For traveling mostly you need to save space as much you can, so I suggest some all-in one lenses frome wide to tele.

Honestly I found this a bit uninspiring. It’s pretty much the ‘holy trinity’ pro line you’ve selected (albeit with the longer tele)… and you could suggest these as the default choice for any occasion.

For travel, personally I’m looking for lightness above all, and creative possibilities. Currently packing the 20f1.8 and either the 45f2.5 or the 55f1.8.

I like the idea of the Sony system but when I look at the lens prices, especially the G lenses, I ask myself why? If I’m going to pay Leica prices, I might as well buy a Leica. Sony cameras and lenses are nice but not THAT nice. That and when I look at Sony photos, they’re razor sharp but lack feeling. Just like a total snapshot of reality that’s flat without any emotion in the exposure.

m43 1235/2.8, 35100/2.8

Our three corgis thank you for the great corgi eye level photo! Glad that we bumped into each other in Vulcan!

Tamron 17-28, Sony 24-105 and Sigma 100-400 is perfect for me and the money saved (with very little image quality trade off) over the GM glass easily pays for gas, hotels and food ;)

In the past, I've traveled with a kit of these exact three lenses. However, after reviewing which ones I actually used, I've stopped bringing the 24-70 in favour of lighter, faster prime like the 55 1.8 for standard focal coverage. The weight savings has made a noticeable difference.

I've switched to the 24-105mm. That and the 16-35mm make a great travel kit.

FE 40 mm. If on vacation and you feel burdened by the bulk of your gear. The new 40 is a fun and great little gem.

Sony 24-105, Sony 100-400 with a 1.4 teleconverter, and Tamron 17-28 covers everything

Tampon 35-150 f2 f2.8 hands down

$7,700 Canadian Dollars just on the lenses alone, plus at least another $1,800 for the least expensive(at time of posting) full frame Sony body at TCS. Plus the weight of all that pro level zoom glass, break the bank and your back. Would have liked some budget friendly & light weight recommendations as well.

Too heavy. Here's better challenge;
A Camera. I'll let you have a new OM-1.
A lens. You can have a 17mm lens. Three batteries, one or two big cards. Off you go.

Yeah, I've done it. The camera was an OM-D E-M1 II.

If I buy these lenses, there is no money left for travelling.

im using the tamron 28-200mm for travel + the the samyang 14mm, thats it.

What you’re talking about, is cose to the normal trinity. For travel?! Really?! I don’t want to take 6-10k of gear on a trip.
Sony is some kind of problem in terms for travel lenses. It’s 24-240mm is way to soft, lets call it what it is, completely outdated and unusable.
Canons 24-240mm is a peace of gold compared to the Sony.
At Sony there is just the Tamron 28-200mm and when you miss a wider view, buy a cheap 17-28mm to complete the range. The package is small and lightweight and makes way more sence, like the one, you’re presenting here.
I for myself did it a bit the other way around, I just take an old but small A7RI with a lightweight 50mm F1.8 with me and my primary camera for travel is a RX100VII with it’s 24-200mm, as there is nothing in the Sony line up, that matches this versatility.

No thanx, never zoom Lenses.

Great video. And very timely with vacation season approaching. I agree with you about a 24-70 f2.8. It’s what’s on my camera most of the time when I travel. I am debating what to take as a second lens. I will either take a wider zoom or a 70-200.

Those Sony lenses especially 16-35 and 24-70 both excellent lenses but are heavy.for travel I have Tamron 17-28 and 28-200 that way you cut out having to lug around a third lens also save weight .

Personally I don't like (ultra) wide angle lenses. I like 50 and longer. On my Sony A6300 I use the Sony SEL 55-210mm mostly. Unfortunately absolutely crappy image quality (not enough sharpness) when shooting (moving) aircraft or cars. For wide angle I use SEL 16-50mm. Also pretty awful image quality imho.

For travel i never would consider a 2.8 lens the 24-105 combined with a 1.8 (20/35 or 55 lens) is my choice

GM lenses are quite heavy and very pricey. 24-105 f4 is more versatile and pared with the 50mm 2.5 you'd have a compact prime when wanting to have a lower profile.
I'm thinking of taking either my Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 and Sony 20mm 1.8 or the 35mm 1.8, Batis 85mm 1.8 and 20mm 1.8 when travelling later this year. The zoom is a practical approach but I find shooting primes a lot more enjoyable.

My 2 years old phone can take similar pictures as those, that's why I only take one large aperture prime or telephoto with me for travel, no need for super wide angle or normal zoom anymore.

I would carry a 28mm & a 135mm.

Another great video with an excellent script showing actual use of different lenses in the field. One other lens that is an excellent choice is the 24-105 G lens, it's not as sharp as the 24-70 GM lens, but the focal length flexibility is pretty nice, especially if that is the only lens one carries. Again, enjoy very much your videos, keep up the great work!

Make one fuji x

I thought I'd see 24-105. What a surprise 😮

For travel, me personally prefer superzoom lens like Sony FE 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS (I wish Sony updated this old lens) or the newer Tamron FE 28-200mm f/2.8-5.6 or Sony E 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS if you use APS-C body. It's relatively lightweight for that kind of focal range. Yeah I know it's not as sharp as the G or G Master lineup and sucks when used in lower light situations, but you can complement that with prime lenses like 35mm f/1.8, cheap nifty fifty 50mm f/1.8, or maybe Sigma 16mm/35mm/56mm f/1.4 if you use APS-C body.

I'm taking the Tamron 28-200 and the Tamron 17-28 f2.8 along with the Sony a7c. I am going to take one fast prime with me as well. I may throw in the kit lens if I want stay really compact. I am also considering taking along my Sony a6500 body as a back up.

May consider to add a large aperture wide angle lens, e.g. 35mm GM or 35mm f/1.8 for low light situation and indoor photos.

Compared to these lenses, Is the Sony 24-240mm really as bad optically as they say?